I'm getting ready to send this up the chain but I was curious about feedback here:

When I went through the MS training, I got a lot of data out of it as I'm not a pilot. That being said, we did have at least one pilot who was in the training who had to sit through what I believe are a lot of Pilot 101 items that I think are capable of being checked off in advance by virtue of being a pilot. As an example, Task P-2017, Identify and Discuss Major Aircraft Instruments.

CAPR 60-3 states in 2-1 e.

Quote

Waivers of the specialty qualification training requirements specified in paragraph2-3 must be requested in accordance with paragraph 1-2 of this regulation, be based onequivalent training received from other agencies and substantiated by appropriatedocumentation, and must be coordinated with CAP-USAF prior to approval. NHQ CAP/DOmust approve all such waivers. Broad waivers for known equivalent training will be posted onthe NHQ CAP/DOS website.

With that in mind, does it make sense to identify items where pilots have documented knowledge and streamline these courses for them?

Secondarily, does anyone know where the "broad waivers" are documented on the website are?

With that in mind, does it make sense to identify items where pilots have documented knowledge and streamline these courses for them?

Secondarily, does anyone know where the "broad waivers" are documented on the website are?

No and no.

Being a pilot does not automagically mean you know what is necessary to be CAP aircrew. Since no formal training is required, a pilot, or anyone else so inclined, is free to challenge the SQTR tasks at any time an SET is inclinedto uncap his pen.

« Last Edit: November 10, 2017, 09:04:07 PM by Eclipse »

Logged

If it doesn't make you money or doesn't make you happy, stop doing it.

With that in mind, does it make sense to identify items where pilots have documented knowledge and streamline these courses for them?

Secondarily, does anyone know where the "broad waivers" are documented on the website are?

No and no.

Being a pilot does not automagically mean you know what is necessary to be CAP aircrew. Since no formal training is required, a pilot, or anyone else so inclined, is free to challenge the SQTR tasks at any time and SET is inclinedto uncap his pen.

I've yet to meet the pilot that didn't know how to answer the following:

When I first joined, I asked about these things out of couriosity, and the answer my squadron CFI gave me was ... its the military/CAP way. If a 10,000 hour airline pilot comes in the door and wants to join our squadron, he is treated just the same as some new PPL with 50 hours. Everyone starts at the beginning. Everyone is a rookie. The guy with 10,000 hours still has to wait 5 years before he can wear the Command Pilot Wings even though he may be the best pilot in the Wing. It is, what it is.

When I first joined, I asked about these things out of couriosity, and the answer my squadron CFI gave me was ... its the military/CAP way. If a 10,000 hour airline pilot comes in the door and wants to join our squadron, he is treated just the same as some new PPL with 50 hours. Everyone starts at the beginning. Everyone is a rookie. The guy with 10,000 hours still has to wait 5 years before he can wear the Command Pilot Wings even though he may be the best pilot in the Wing. It is, what it is.

When I first joined, I asked about these things out of couriosity, and the answer my squadron CFI gave me was ... its the military/CAP way. If a 10,000 hour airline pilot comes in the door and wants to join our squadron, he is treated just the same as some new PPL with 50 hours. Everyone starts at the beginning. Everyone is a rookie. The guy with 10,000 hours still has to wait 5 years before he can wear the Command Pilot Wings even though he may be the best pilot in the Wing. It is, what it is.

That may well be the epitaph for Civil Air Patrol.

" It is, what it is. "

R.I.P.

So...CAP just hands out ratings to anyone who says they "know" and crosses their fingers?

Liability much?

I'm not going to show a Ranger how to use a compass, but if he knows how he darn sure better be able to show me, and it should be such a non-effort as to be nothing more then matter of fact.

Also, a "10,000 hour airline pilot" may not have flown a GA plane in a decade. Want some fun?Ever seen a poop-hot F16 jock work on remembering techniques for GA airports, normal flightplanning and similar "low and slow". Those guys are used to drawing a straight line on a map andand burning ozone like it was free.

You might be surprised how many people who "know"...don't, or need a little refresher time.

« Last Edit: November 10, 2017, 10:23:20 PM by Eclipse »

Logged

If it doesn't make you money or doesn't make you happy, stop doing it.

I spent 20 years in the Navy as an avionics tech. All that stuff the pilot looks at on the instrument panel fits pretty much into the avionics arena. You have to know what it does to be able to do an op check on it. Does that knowledge qualify me for the task enumerated above?

I spent 20 years in the Navy as an avionics tech. Radios also fall into that arena. Does my experience there give me any advanced standing as a Communicator? I know how to turn them on, change the channel, and do a proper radio check. I can hump 60 pound black boxes with the best of them. Does that qualify me?

Where is the line? A brief review of each part of the applicable tasks ensures that a trainee meets the requirement.

I'll provide "the rest of the story" in a subsequent post, after y'all have a chance to comment.

I spent 20 years in the Navy as an avionics tech. All that stuff the pilot looks at on the instrument panel fits pretty much into the avionics arena. You have to know what it does to be able to do an op check on it. Does that knowledge qualify me for the task enumerated above?

I spent 20 years in the Navy as an avionics tech. Radios also fall into that arena. Does my experience there give me any advanced standing as a Communicator? I know how to turn them on, change the channel, and do a proper radio check. I can hump 60 pound black boxes with the best of them. Does that qualify me?

Where is the line? A brief review of each part of the applicable tasks ensures that a trainee meets the requirement.

I'll provide "the rest of the story" in a subsequent post, after y'all have a chance to comment.

I'm drawing the line at: The FAA handed these people a flight certificate after they proved knowledge in the areas in question.

Also, a "10,000 hour airline pilot" may not have flown a GA plane in a decade. Want some fun?Ever seen a poop-hot F16 jock work on remembering techniques for GA airports, normal flightplanning and similar "low and slow". Those guys are used to drawing a straight line on a map andand burning ozone like it was free.

And yet that is a non sequiter. Any licensed pilot (and for that matter any Earhart Award honoree) knows the aerospace basics that are covered in MS basic. But again, you knew that, right?

I spent 20 years in the Navy as an avionics tech. All that stuff the pilot looks at on the instrument panel fits pretty much into the avionics arena. You have to know what it does to be able to do an op check on it. Does that knowledge qualify me for the task enumerated above?

I spent 20 years in the Navy as an avionics tech. Radios also fall into that arena. Does my experience there give me any advanced standing as a Communicator? I know how to turn them on, change the channel, and do a proper radio check. I can hump 60 pound black boxes with the best of them. Does that qualify me?

I'm trying to address the big picture encompassing all training. Does a private pilot certificate make someone more "special" than other folks who have institutional knowledge in their own specialties? I contend that a brief examination of everyone's qualifications is prudent, to provide better consistency in the training process.

I'm trying to address the big picture encompassing all training. Does a private pilot certificate make someone more "special" than other folks who have institutional knowledge in their own specialties? I contend that a brief examination of everyone's qualifications is prudent, to provide better consistency in the training process.

And I don't see the point in going down that rabbit hole when it seems like you are at the minimum ambivalent about the entire idea. The reg provides for a waiver protocol; I asked if a nationally recognized certificate issued by a federal agency would cover a narrow scope of SQTRs which are covered directly in the training and are used in daily operations of said operators. There is a 1 to 1 comparison of not just the knowledge of the device but how it is used there along with a federal certification to boot... if we can't agree that this standard meets the bar for a waiver there is literally no point in talking about institutional certifications you may have received for identifying and using equipment, but not while flying.